Content Count

Points

Content Count

Popular Content

From this point forward, and until further notice, deliberate thread derails with accusations of people being sockpuppets, discussing sockpuppets, pretty much ANYTHING sockpuppet related, will result in an instant 48h ban from accessing the site. Further instances will result in a seven day ban. These warning points will not be removed. Once you hit ten points, you will be suspended from the site permanently.
Feel free to use the report function for any you think we missed, however I'm allowing a grace period for the next two hours to allow time for people to read this. This policy does not apply retrospectively to anything already posted, if you report things posted before midday today you will also get a ban for wasting our time.
This place has become a toilet because of the actions of a few. You know who you are. Stop it.

We've spent a bit of time talking about this, both in person and online, and considered many options, including just shutting the doors.
However, none of us really wanted to do that so we're thrashed around a few ideas around what changes we could make. What we all agreed was that the key changes that we needed to make were at the registration gateway. I wont go into the details of what we discarded as what we've ultimately settled on is pretty straightforward.
Registrations are now enabled, but new accounts need to be manually approved before they're allowed to use the site in any way. You wont be able to PM anyone, you wont be able to post or reply, you wont even be able to log in until someone has done this. There's nothing you can do to speed the process up, don't email us or find other ways to try and accelerate it. In fact, it's fairly safe to say that our patience is somewhat thin at the moment and harassing us externally isn't going to get your account approved quicker - more likely the opposite.
There's clearly going to be a lag, and we'll make our best efforts to approve genuine new accounts as quickly as we can but there's no SLA here, it's basically when we get to it. If you register on a Wednesday morning at 4am then I'm sorry (Note: Not really sorry) but you may have to wait a few hours for someone to see it. Equally, mods aren't around all the time, some of us don't have access at work, some of us actually do work when we're there and every now and then we do leave our houses and away from the Internet in the evening.
We're also not going to get it right every time. Rejecting an account is very binary, it's just a yes or no, and there's no opportunity to give reasons why and we have no desire to contact people via email to explain why their account is rejected. If you're a genuine new user and your account is rejected, then I'm sorry (Note: Actually sorry about this), we're rather have to deal with the occasional mistake than swimming in the fecal matter of the toilet bowl this place had become.
It's not ideal, but it's the least disruptive action to take for existing members, as well as avoiding a massive administrative overhead from our side. We hope we can relax this in the future but there's no set timescale for this and we'll probably do it silently anyway.
This doesn't mean the "New Rules" have changed in terms of zero tolerance to disruptive behaviour. That's still in place and accounts will still be canned, but the full permaban is only going to be used in extreme circumstances. Getting a three day ban doesn't mean you just register a new account and carry on, it means you're supposed to be excluded for three days. Trying to get round that initial ban is only going to increase it.
We would like to thank everyone who's taken the time to post up suggestions, offered support both in public and via PM and we think people understand why we did what we did. Interestingly enough, the activity metrics didn't really take much of a hit - daily activity is still higher than it was in August for example so it's not been as destructive as some seem to have tried to portray and I think we're pretty comfortable in the assumption that the dip in activity is directly related to shedding a few high volume shitposters that we didn't want here anyway. So in that regard, it's been a zero sum game.

At midnight on the 28th May, I Ieave the Isle of Man Constabulary a bit ahead of the intended schedule on a medical discharge, and will have to make my own way in the world again. I'm fortunate enough in that my overall health is good, but hip issues have finally diminished my operational deployability to the stage that I'm about as much use as a chocolate teapot in that regard. I'm of a rank where that ability to run about and fight with the odd ne'er do well is still a occupational requirement, so its time to stand down and let others do that on our behalf.
Its obviously a time of mixed emotions; the police has been a big part of my life and I leave in the most interesting of times. The world, and 'The Job' are changing at an incredible pace, and I think it will take a while to come to terms with not being a part of it all. But, there is a whole world out there, and other than a bit of surgery to navigate in due course, the future is bright and exciting.
And I will dearly miss being an 'official' commentator on these hallowed forums. Its hotter than Hades some days, but I've enjoyed the banter (most of it) the challenge (all of it) and the fact that behind all the thud and bluster, there are people on here that genuinely do give a monkeys about what happens on our Island.
I may or may not pop back up on here in my own name, but if not, be excellent to each other.
Derek

As it is being restored by volunteers and donations I think it's entirely up to people whether they choose to support it or not
As you say there is a risk that it will not be a success. If you do not believe in the goal then I think you are right to not support it, why should you?
I, however, want to give it a chance to succeed and do believe that it is a historical asset to the town. So I do support it.
Simple.

Guys... i.e. Jack and Notty - I have neither of you on ignore, but I do find this 'you're embarrassing yourself', 'you're drunk and have probably shat yourself', 'you're hboy's sock', 'everyone ignores you' mindless repartee to be a bit tiresome. Can't you both just grow up a bit? Make your points, which on both sides are often reasonable, and if another storms in with shitty ad hominem attacks just don't respond.
The forum would be a better place if you did.

Reading through the reports and listening to what was said; what seems to come though it all is the sheer arrogance of all concerned. It just exemplifies to me all that is completely wrong with the IOM and what will continue stop a proper diversified and big tax paying free market private sector developing. They are putting on an event that WE pay for through our taxes. The event relies on a huge number of people and groups who provide their time for free (from marshalls to boy scouts doing the scores), it also relies on normal residents putting up people in their own homes year after year, and without those people the event could not possibly happen. Yet clearly those (exemplified by Husseys comments) who are paid as part of this whole exercise of setting fire to millions of pounds of our money, clearly believe that it's the right for government and Departments like the DED to capitalize on the event exclusively for the benefit of itself and the people within IOMG. It's easy to imagine this fuck up is going to cost US another few mill by the time Vision Nine have been bought off as part of this mess as well. These people have fed off government salaries for almost all of their careers. Most have never taken a commercial risk in their entire lives. They probably have no idea what it's like to put your own money on the line to back an idea or an initiative and if you fuck it up its your house on the line, and your family impacted, and your car repossessed. They can play at being entrepreneurs and at being business men with our money and they don't even have to be any fucking good at it as there is no moral hazard whatsoever. If they fuck up we still pay and they lose nothing. Nobody is going to be the next Bernie Ecclestone if they're living on a £60k a year guaranteed salary, and a gold plated pension, and they'll still get it whether they lose millions or not. If they fuck up WE pay for it and their lives are not adversely impacted in any way at all. Yet they're telling many people who might have been out there and taken risks and experienced a whole variety of good and bad business decisions to create wealth that they know best. It's crazy. Anyone with any commercial experience would likely have told them that this was a shit idea 4 years ago. Now we will probably end up compensating Vision Nine after all this evidence has been heard; as there's a high chance that this has been a badly executed shit idea from a bunch of clueless civil servants from the start. But they will still continue getting paid very nice salaries until they retire. And then get very nice pensions for life. It's only the taxpayer assuming the risk for some apparently not very successful or competent people on secure salaries and benefits playing at being Bernie Ecclestone. .

A decade or so ago, my wife was bequeathed a reasonable sum by her last surviving parent.
As an aside, the will contained a couple of grand to each of half a dozen charities.
Having seen the bare-faced-cheek of those charities, hounding (and I mean HOUNDING) my wife during her period of grief (she was also executor) - we will never, ever, bequeath or donate to any charity that
a) Has a professional fund raising team
b) Employs Directors on £100k plus salaries plus mega pensions ( in addition to their ex-public service pensions usually).
or,
c) Stops behaving like charity and sets itself up as a pseudo police force taking people to prosecution (RSPCA etc.) and fund raises on blatantly political grounds.
We have done a 180 Degree about turn - they will get zero, we now deal only with local charities with no employed (or pensioned) staff.
It has been a tough lesson to learn, but boy has it been learnt!

I know of someone who recently had his career wrecked and needed mental health care after pointing out the misdemeanors of his superior at one of our local government departments. Try telling him it was worth it!

The people I feel sorry for are the householders who thought they were going to be getting a nice picture of "a child reading a book, to tie it in with the library", and instead got a 70s Prog Rock album cover.

Not stealing but morally wrong. I did without in the early years to provide a home for my family. For this, I can expect Thomas and his gang to sell my home to pay for my care. Those that didn't bother buying a property get it for free.

And yet we still need
£300,000 spending at the airport so less passengers suffer less delays
£80,000,000 spending on the port to process less passengers
£30,000,000 on the Liverpool dock
£11,000,000 on a cruise terminal
i genuinely fucking despair at how much managing a total decline in everything is costing the taxpayer to be ‘managed’ by people who are basically fucking clueless.

There are always exceptions of course but generally the best way to hang on to your parents house and assets is to not put them in a home and off load the cost to someone else and look after them yourself. You know, like we used to do.

That the Honourable Members should be locked in the building and not permitted to emerge until they have produced a credible Programme For Government which sets out the roadmap, actions and timetable for balancing the budget, together with audited financial projections. Once they've done that, they can go back to deciding where the Lord Bishop sits and all the rest.

"Space: the stuff between MHK's ears. These are the voyages of the Department of Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new ways of wasting money, to seek out new contracts that will never work and new ways to fund our own pensions, to boldly talk bollocks like no man has talked bollocks before."

I don't agree, John. We do not hear about every cough, sneeze, incident, just that "something has happened". There was a spate of unusual stuff with no clear information.
We hear on international news all the time, within minutes, about serious incidents, usually stabbings at the moment sadly. Every community in the world will have as much interest in what has happened in the next street as we do.
It is not nosiness, but openness. This is an open society, and without wanting to jeopardise an investigation, why can't information be given?
Frankly, when information is withheld in a criminal process there has to be a very good reason. After all, the basis of criminal law is that an offence has been committed against the whole of society. Criminality is a public offence.
I would repeat that I would not expect or demand that information is given that jeopardises an investigation, but when general information is not forthcoming, you do have to question the "contract" that the individual members of society has with the state.
We do live in a relatively safe place, but that should not have any relevance to openness. Quite the reverse.

The two men have been interviewed about their alleged involvement in a number of instances of suspicious activity. They were captured on CCTV taking a ride on a horse tram and then walking back along Douglas Promenade holding what was identified as a cigarette pack with a sketch of Douglas Promenade on the reverse of the carton.
Chief Minister Quayle immediately issued a press statement from his villa in the Algarve to say that he did not recognise either of these people, and any suggestion that they were government officials was quite ridiculous. He went on to say that despite being on holiday, he had his finger absolutely on the pulse. He closed by sending his best wishes fo everyone involved with the Rally this weekend.
The investigation continues.

If they are so confident it can't be run as a pub then they shouldn't have to put a covenant on it ?
100+years ago it was common place to put such a covenant on any residential building, so that the tone of an area wouldn't be lowered, but for a brewery to put such a covenant on one of their own pubs just strikes me that they are afraid of someone opening it as a pub and showing the brewery as perhaps incompetent.

Should be capped at £25k (remember that this is in addition to state pension), and lump sum capped at £75k.
This would be seen by the wider population as at least more acceptable.
It is only a small percentage of government pensioners receiving grotesque amounts and it is getting the rest tarred with the same brush.

So Jersey is actually looking to bring in a tighter work permit system for low wage workers just at the same time that we are being lobbied to do away with work permits by the Chamber of Commerce as apparently they are 'prohibiting growth'
https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2017/09/16/work-permit-system-for-low-skilled-immigrants/
Seems mad that we are considering opening the gates, especially to low income workers who pay hardly anything in tax and who will suck up free taxpayer services, when a rival jurisdiction has obviously decided that it needs to put up the drawbridge.

3 times in 2 years I've had this bloody cheapskate round looking at my house. I know he's desperate to have it or he wouldn't keep coming back and we've had the conversation 3 times now, but the bastard just won't admit he's smitten with it and put his hand in his pocket. Wasting agent's and vendor's bloody time.........
Next time he comes - and he will - we're gonna shut the curtains and pretend to be out! Tosser.

In this regard only we have a shared position, I too often have cause to wonder about the justice of ‘it’ all, if ‘it’ can be defined as causality, and effect, so far as the conduct of Government goes.
In your interesting post, you have used the word ‘apparently’ three times, ‘appears’ once, ‘murky’ once, ‘concocted’ once. You obviously have some axe to grind large or small regarding the Irving’s, which is manifestly apparent from the composition of your post. Be that as it may.
I am not qualified in the law and have ‘no dog in the fight’ to attempt to address the finer points of the judgment as handed down by the Deemster Corlett, but I do have observations to make about naïve businessmen, and failure to pay tax and national insurance by businesses on the Isle of Man.
If the contention is that the Irving’s are to be held culpable and subject to public vilification because they jointly or individually failed to keep proper accounts or pay on demand tax and NI then let’s have equanimity and make all in that category subject to equal treatment.
So, were the Directors of the Sefton Group who failed to pay tax and NI and who at various times claimed to Government that the company/ companies were balance sheet insolvent subject to public vilification?
They were not publicly vilified. As they described it later before a Committee of Inquiry, they were valiant business warriors struggling against the tyranny of Graham Ferguson Lacey, a man Allan Bell described as a lunatic running the madhouse.
They protested that they had done all they could to curb the excesses of GFL, in fact they hadn’t liked him or his business methods, and he in turn hadn’t much liked them, as they now told it.
The facts are they hadn’t paid the company’s bills as they had fallen due, and the Government was a substantial creditor, however, a political decision was made not to go to the Courts to obtain a winding-up order and liquidate the Sefton Group companies.
Then we have the matter of EuroManx. A company that kept no accounts or accurate financial records and was to all extents and purposes balance sheet insolvent almost, if not actually from the moment it was trading on the IOM.
Those Directors kept no accounts, didn’t pay the bills as they fell due and owed the Government substantial sums of money. Ex-Chief Minister Brown described EuroManx as a company he and his administration ‘had become very fond of’.
No application to the Courts to wind-up EuroManx by the Treasury or anybody else in the IOM Government was made. The final loss to the public purse is available to anyone wanting to know what that sum is by simple dint of effort to go and find it.
Were those Directors subject to public vilification? No they were not. What about moves to disqualify post the inevitable court order to wind-up the Company, no, nothing was done.
So who are the naïve businessmen? If being naïve is enough to visit dire consequences upon those culpable of it, then let the tumbrils roll and crowd them in, because on past events alone it would take more than one cart to carry them all
Deemster Corlett in his judgment wrote that he found Mr Harding’s conduct ‘inexplicable’ and he stated that so far as Mr Carter was concerned a possible explanation for his conduct in regards with Mr Harding in the ‘conduct of the case is characterised by his willingness to bend over backwards to be fair to the Government's arguments rather than to be a fearless advocate for his own client’.
Some may say that is an accurate description of someone who could be fairly described as a ‘lickspittle’. With regards to other aspects of his conduct others might say that he was self-admittedly well out of his depth, and was simply incompetent to deal with the matters he was being paid to deal with.
If your face fits, is an expression often used to explain in short form the often inexplicable reasons why some are favoured and others are not. Why some are forgiven transgressions and others not, why some are made into mult-millionaires and others are laid low, why some companies are wound-up and others have multi-millions of public money provided to keep them afloat.
The Irving’s case has done this much, it has given the public an object lesson of what can happen when your face doesn’t fit and people take it upon themselves to act on that.
If we are to have things done in the IOM with a view to ‘justice’ , then let’s have justice applied equally. We are a long way from that as I see it from where we are standing now.
As for Icarus, that is a much more apposite description to be made about the IOM Government’s modus operandi than any small businessman’s ambition that I have seen on the Isle of Man.

The women are seeking parity of the abortion laws in the IOM with those of the U.K. Presently of course access to abortion is here is profoundly limited. To make their point about the consequential lesser status of women on the Island, occasioned by our abortion laws, they dressed as characters from a 1985 novel called "The Handmaid's Tale" by a Canadian author, Margaret Atwood. In the novel, a fundamentalist Christian sect, which has replaced the government of the USA, diminishes the role of women to effectively nothing more than child-bearers, leaving women with no rights, and no "voice". The novel was recently televised with Elisabeth Moss, of "Madmen" fame, in the principal role.
This display at Tynwald was, in my opinion, the most effective political/social statement ever seen in the IOM, alongside Alan Shea in his Auschwitz uniform. I wish these women every success in their campaign to bring about equity for Manx women, just as I equally wish nothing but failure and disappointment to those striving to uphold (or even limit further) our existing abortion laws, and in the process cynically labelling their cruel endeavours as "reform".

You just can't be churlish about the Island Games. Conceived and born in the Isle of Man, it is a wonderful spectacle of endeavour and achievement that allows the peoples of small communities the chance to meet and compete against teams drawn from similar sized populations from near and far.
The Games have given pleasure to millions over the years. They are a massive feather in the cap of the Isle of Man and a fitting epitaph for Geoff Corlett. What a smashing bequest to leave to the youngsters.

Well thanks for that. However, I disagree that I don’t have a perspective.
I actually think the dismantling of the north western rail lines in the 70’s was a strategic mistake. I also think the Island has some incredible heritage, scenery and locations. There are some early signs of some real new impetus in focus on both the enjoyment of locals, and the benefit of tourists.
However;
We are dealing with the here and now. The Island is in a dire mess, across all sectors, and in respect of the horse trams, the time had come to draw a line. DBC actually demonstrated more strategic perspective than IOMG in this case. There are limits to the amount of money that can be literally pissed down the drain, and as we are using the health service in our conversation, 300k equates to around four GP’s or ten nurses.
and where did the suggestion that I knew anything about the health service come from? I only worked alongside practitioners daily, and closely for twenty years, and do so daily now. And as for wider Manx life, working in the public sector, seeing first hand how departments ‘work’ and paying my taxes as a resident. Yes, I suppose you are right - clueless!
and as for the boat in the morning quip - probably the biggest indictment of what remains wrong with the place.
I only offer opinion. I’d be enlightened to hear an expansion of yours some time.
Im sure we all would.

400 farmers...so that means all of them, plus a few pretend farmers - i.e. landowners that are currently "helping their land return back to organic status" (in other words, they just own land and not shat all with it).
What happened when I had a really bad year and was out of work? Oh yea, I got £57 a week to feed a family of 4 with. What happened to my brother when orders dried up after the crash in 2008 and he had to re-mortgage his house? Oh yea - nothing. He worked his arse off to pull it back from the brink.
I've yet to meet a poor farmer, so if you know any, please let me know.

Few points to make on this topic. As all are aware I am a Noble’s consultant, but I’m not in the top 10 this thread refers to.
Firstly, the consultant pay scale here is the same as the UK, broadly, except we have additional automatic progression through 20 points whereas in the UK the higher points have to be applied for based on other roles, the so called merit award system. This automatic progression is used as a selling point to attract applicants here, and in my view it’s not a bad thing. In the UK the people who get the awards are usually the ones who are never at the hospital because they’re on national committees etc. Here at least we’re paid for loyalty/longevity of tenure.
The second point is job planning. Each consultant has a job plan which details how many sessions per week they work. The basic is 10 for full time, notionally 40 hours per week including some hours for continuing professional development. Most consultants here work more than 10, because we generally have fewer consultants than the colleges recommend. In my specialty, based on our population we should have 5 or 6 consultants. There are 4 of us. Paying 4 people to do the work of 5 or 6 makes sense for the employer as there are reduced superannuation contributions and in the future fewer pensions to pay. And pensions are based on the basic 10 sessions. This is one reason our salaries are higher than the UK where generally NHS trusts have pared things to the bone with everyone on 10.
We’re also not comparing like with like. In the NHS consultants will do extra NHS work in the private sector, using the ‘choose and book’ facility the GPs there have. This salary will not be included in the NHS figures we’re comparing with. There are other things too which make the figures incomparable. In our top ten numbers, additional bank work is counted - this is when a colleague goes on leave and instead of paying for an external agency locum the work is kept in-house for additional pay. Agency locums do cost a fortune, certainly in shortage specialties, but I don’t think Max’s 500K example is right.
It does cost a lot to employ a consultant. I don’t know how much is right, but if we’re made public enemy number 1 and get accused of fleecing the NHS then I can guarantee recruitment, hard enough as it is, will get worse, and this will only increase the wage bill as more agency staff are used to plug gaps. As others have pointed out, market forces apply, and where people might like to think of the medical profession as Dr Kildare types doing it for the love of humanity, the reality is that the pressures and risks associated with the job are increasing and unless we’re paid well people won’t do it.

Not sure of the appropriateness of the forum’s legal expert posting screenshots from my FB page. Read the t&c’s recently JW?
But yes, it was me. Most impressed with the professionalism of the SP staff who helped me do what I could. Also impressed with the amount of kit/drugs they carry - puts airlines to shame.
Captain and I decided returning to IOM was the best course of action. I handed over to paramedics who were waiting for us at the port, and then went back on the boat to restart my trip. Hope the chap’s OK.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=39081&headline=Police in drugs factory bust&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2018
Yesterday morning the police arrested the owner of a cannabis farm and took some photos of the same. It is very disappointing to see these misguided cannabis growers making the same old mistakes time after time. The yellowing of the leaves in the photos are clear signs of incorrect root pH balance or nitrogen deficiency.

Easy to increase visitor numbers - take control of the boats and discount ferry crossings massively. I suspect the SPC is the main reason for the decline as they have shareholders to answer to who are only interested in sweating their assets, and such a vital part of our economy and infrastructure should be owned by the people.

You get the impression that Humbles got her support by wandering around Prospect Hill (where presumably she works some of the time), pestering MHKs to back her like a small child getting sponsors for a charity event. Whether the later ones knew she already had enough to stand would be an interesting piece of knowledge and they might be annoyed they had 'used up' one of their 'supports' on someone who didn't need it.
If MHKs stick to the spirit of the law (rather than the mess of words they have produced) and only support five, Allinson, Baker and Harmer already seem to have used theirs up and Ashford, Caine, Hooper, Perkins, Shimmins and Thomas all have done four. I reckon there enough spare supports going for another ten.
One of the defining characteristics of MLC elections is that they are perpetually changing the rules to stop it looking silly and/or crooked. And each time they do they manage to produce an outcome that looks even more ridiculous and bent than the previous one. So I have high hopes of what, with this multiplicity of candidates, is already promising to be what is technically known as a 'clusterfuck'.

Thank you for your kind comments.
Maybe it's just me but I'm starting to tire (to the point of nausea) of the whole damn lot of them and it. From 5 years of being lied to (yes, lied to) by Bell and Teare to the current bunch of clueless chancers and their entourage.
UK Govt gave us a measure of slack in how we conduct our affairs. Look what they (yes, they as in Tynwalds past and present) have done with it - now billions in debt and liabilities and a population in hock to monopolies for the basics. And we then let them retire on huge pensions and golden handshakes as if they'd served us and our interests well. The mention of failures is taboo and they're ignored and forgotten whilst they march on to the next fiasco.
Time for some accountability and reality, I'd say. And it doesn't involve £7k junkets to the Seychelles. Anywhere else and there'd be people on the streets with placards.

Personally, until I see concrete evidence, I shall file this announcement with Skelly's previous statements pertaining to the arrival of 6 Chinese banks, the 500 new jobs announced in January last and the 400 families expected to move to the Island.
It's filed under "H". For Horseshit.

Yes, that would be a better plan. We have far too much government, the Island seems to have developed into a tiny clone of the UK, rather than a place with government suitable to its size and population. A place this size could be run by a unitary authority, and our parliament does not require an upper chamber. We are smaller in area and in population than many unitary authorities in the UK.
So get rid of the commissioners and their associated bureaucracy, get rid of the undemocratic Legislative Council and any bureaucratic support they have. Centralise everything, the Island is only 30 odd miles long and 14 miles wide, for goodness sake!

Superb - if the planners reject this they're insane. Premier Inn are well managed, excellent staff ethic, first rate accommodation for the price and offer decent food too. They may only rate as 3 star hotels but I've used them often, in various U.K. locations, and wouldn't hesitate to support the opening of one here. The fact that it's a new build and not a refurb is a bonus. We need the "endorsement" of nationally recognized brands such as this for leisure and business travellers. Bring it on.